ctcf

What kinda cheese is on it?

It's official: Brian Roberts will be traded Saturday.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

There was a chitchat thread once in social. I'm not sure but I think some transactions and or game threads may top this as well.

Starting a band name with the word Twisted makes me want to include Sister in the name somewhere... Twisted Sister's Testicle? Even better

Really could have gone my whole life without reading the phrase "twisted testicle" actually. Although that would make a great band name...

beat ya ;) I was lookng forward to what Williams could do, but I do like Briggs alot. Welcome back LB. Nicely done sir. I'm so freaking pumped.

Briggs 6/36 per trib. WOOO!

Bruce Levine needs to shut up and stop getting my hopes up.

Reading "amoung" that many times hurt.

Actually no. I hope its only a 3 for 1 deal now with the players said above. I wouldn't mind if Ceda was repalced with Veal, in fact I would like that deal much better. I am happy Murton isn't part of the rumors we are hearing anymore. I could live without Ceda and Cedeno. Gallagher will be missed, but like said earlier (I think Raw said it) we have to give up talent to get talent. I'd rather give up Veal instead as well.

We should totally trade for Brady Quinn...

Really? I haven't noticed. You didn't read the steaming pile of **** that was on Bruce's article? Really, they aren't funny anymore. They should take some time off and look for some new material. So because they criticized one article of a writer you like they are: 1.) No longer funny and 2.) Desperate for articles. Great.

Really? I haven't noticed.

So wait what is the name on Fukudome's jersey officially?

+1million Anonymity goes a long way to making someone a jerk jamie, your name isn't on that post, you must have forgotten to sign it The fact that you are readily able to know my name goes to prove that I am in fact not anonymous nor am I attempting to hide my name. If the contrary were true, i could very easily have never given my name on this website So, it's okay for you to use a screen name for internet ramblings that hundreds of people read because your name is easily out there, but it's not okay for Michael Schur to use a screen name for internet ramblings that hundreds of people read, even though his name is easily out there? Its a travesty such a beautiful post got stuck at the bottom of a page.

As for the trade deadline, I'd imagine the options available then will certainly look different from those up for grabs now.

When is the first ST game?

Since when do you have sources

His initial post is just a copy and paste from Rotoworld.

I actually love the Grays as is. I can't stand the cuba script.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/7816932/K-Rod-has-reason-to-look-forward Just sounds like Rosenthal speculating. Funny, sounds kinda like what Bruce said...

Hilarity. I can't wait for the ban.

I'd like him to also write an article about how horrible and sadistic meat companies are that he most likely buys his food from. On the subject of Chickens (and steer), pretty much all meat eating Americans have no moral high ground. God I sound like a PETa person. I've never understood this. Is there really a connection between eating animals and enjoying their pain and death? That would be like Ultimate Fighting fans being okay with cannibalism . . . okay, now I'm using extreme example. But do you see that point? Honestly, there's a disconnect between animal death and meat-eating -- I know this. It's a neccesity that has evolved. We feel better about it having not seen the death or presided over it. I can see the problem with that. But you're bringing morals into it. I think it's nothing more than squeamishness. Saying people who disagree with you are going off on some "moral high ground" can be a pretty easy way to seem like you're right. (not saying you aren't; i just want debate -- and that's a bad argument tactic.) And the "pretty much all meat-eating americans" . . . what's that mean? How are you qualifying those who are logically reconciling this paradox and those who aren't? I'm not even talking about eating them. The point I'm getting at is that before they are killed in whichever manner they are, many live in deplorable, pain and suffering inducing conditions. I honestly don't see the real disconnect between that and cockfighting. Hell, I'd even venture to guess some of those roosters live way better lives (up until the fight at least) than the majority of animals that get to wander through our meat processing industry. So to judge the situation from the American cultural view ends up seeming a bit asinine. Wow. Either you really like cockfighting or you really hate the meat industry. I can't tell which. I really hate the meat industry.

I'd like him to also write an article about how horrible and sadistic meat companies are that he most likely buys his food from. On the subject of Chickens (and steer), pretty much all meat eating Americans have no moral high ground. God I sound like a PETa person. I've never understood this. Is there really a connection between eating animals and enjoying their pain and death? That would be like Ultimate Fighting fans being okay with cannibalism . . . okay, now I'm using extreme example. But do you see that point? Honestly, there's a disconnect between animal death and meat-eating -- I know this. It's a neccesity that has evolved. We feel better about it having not seen the death or presided over it. I can see the problem with that. But you're bringing morals into it. I think it's nothing more than squeamishness. Saying people who disagree with you are going off on some "moral high ground" can be a pretty easy way to seem like you're right. (not saying you aren't; i just want debate -- and that's a bad argument tactic.) And the "pretty much all meat-eating americans" . . . what's that mean? How are you qualifying those who are logically reconciling this paradox and those who aren't? I'm not even talking about eating them. The point I'm getting at is that before they are killed in whichever manner they are, many live in deplorable, pain and suffering inducing conditions. I honestly don't see the real disconnect between that and cockfighting. Hell, I'd even venture to guess some of those roosters live way better lives (up until the fight at least) than the majority of animals that get to wander through our meat processing industry. So to judge the situation from the American cultural view ends up seeming a bit asinine. Why is it asinine to judge it from a cultural view? You brought morals into it . . . how are we to judge what's moral and immoral? And you may be right that the eating isn's the important part. It's the enjoyment of the suffering. A chicken that suffers is just that . . . an animal whose life sucks a bit more than the average animal, which lacks reason and any semblence of a meaningful existance (other than being eaten by an animal that is superior, a la food chain). A person that enjoys said suffering is far worse, and thus the point of the matter. It's irrelevant how enjoyable the lives of the roosters are in regards to other chickens unless your argument favors cockfighting for the animal's sake. My point has been that one animal dying versus another animal dying is not an equal outcome, if one served bloodlust and the other violence. Actually I'm pretty sure the articles brought morals into it, which is what I was criticizing in the first place. Also, judging one culture by another's standards is usually a bad idea (at least in my experience).